Latente magazine advocates, demands, and guarantees ethical behavior in all phases of the editorial cycle for the publication of its issues. The ethical regulations are based on the guidelines established by the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE), which provides a framework for authors, editors, and reviewers to adopt.

Furthermore, in relation to fundamental human rights, Latente adheres to and takes as a reference the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity of ALLEA, 2019. Thus, among other criteria, the journal will not accept any type of racist or sexist content, or any other content that violates those rights.

Finally, the journal will avoid any conflict of interest between authors and reviewers, as well as between them and members of the editorial team.

The following paragraphs summarize the ethical pillars on which the journal is based for the group of actors involved in it.

AUTHORS

Originality if the work

Manuscripts submitted to the journal must be the result of original and unpublished research.

Sufficiency of information

Sufficient information must be provided so that any specialist can repeat the research carried out and confirm or refute the interpretations defended in the work.

Authorship, co-authorship, and requirements

All persons listed as authors must meet certain requirements to receive that designation.

Each author must have participated sufficiently to assume public responsibility for the content of the work. One or more of these persons must be responsible for or in charge of the entire work, from its inception to its final publication, if applicable.

The order of authorship will depend on the decision jointly agreed upon by the authors.

Citations and references

When using materials that are not your own, the sources must be properly indicated, and the corresponding reproduction permissions must be obtained, if necessary.

Plagiarism

Any attempt at plagiarism will result in the rejection of the submitted manuscript or, if not previously detected, the exclusion of the publication and replacement of the reference with “Withdrawn for plagiarism.”

Uniqueness of the work's destination

Authors should not submit the same work or describe essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical behavior.

Correction of errors

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their obligation to notify the journal in a timely manner and to cooperate in correcting the document.

REVIEWER

Knowledge of editorial policies and statements

Reviewers undertake to familiarize themselves with and apply the journal's editorial policies, as well as the supplementary statements set out in the corresponding menus.

Cooperation

Latente reviewers or evaluators will assist the Editorial Team in deciding whether or not to accept a manuscript, as well as in suggesting any modifications that the author may need to make in order to publish a manuscript.

Confidentiality and anonymity

All reviewers are obliged to treat the manuscript assigned to them for evaluation as confidential and, under no circumstances, should they use the information obtained in their blind peer review task for personal gain.

Objectivity and argumentation

Reviews must be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of authors is unacceptable.

Viewpoints should be expressed clearly and supported by arguments, and attention should be drawn to any relevant published work on the subject that has not been cited by the author(s).
Any claim that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously used in other works must be accompanied by the corresponding citation.

Similarity or plagiarism analysis

Reviewers must report to the journal any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript they are reviewing and any other published document of which they are aware.

Refusal to review

Any reviewer must decline to review a manuscript if they consider that it is not within their area of expertise or if, even if it is, they consider that they are not sufficiently qualified to evaluate a proposal.

Likewise, they must decline an invitation to review if they believe that the review will not be objective due to the existence of possible conflicts of interest.

Research misconduct in authorship

If the reviewer considers that the work to be reviewed has engaged in research misconduct, they must inform the journal, which will deal with each case accordingly.

EDITORIAL BOARD

Relevance of manuscript acceptance

The journal's Editorial Board is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal are accepted and ultimately published.

Plagiarism monitoring

The Board will be particularly vigilant with regard to plagiarism.

Impartiality

Members shall always be impartial when managing works proposed for publication, respecting the intellectual independence of authors, who are recognized as having the right of reply in the event of a negative evaluation.

Likewise, they shall always evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content without distinction as to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political orientation of the authors.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, current or potential reviewers, editorial advisors, and, where applicable, section editors.

Respect for the work of others

No member of the Board may use data, arguments, or interpretations contained in unpublished works for their own research, unless they have the express written consent of the author(s).

Guarantee of review effectiveness

All members of the Board will ensure that accepted research papers are evaluated by at least two specialists in the field and that the review process has been fair and impartial. They will also value and appreciate the contribution of those who collaborate in the evaluation of manuscripts.